A spokesperson for Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO) has confirmed a complaint was filed last week with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) alleging inattentiveness and, in some cases, on-duty naps by ANO security personnel.

ANO communications specialist Donna Gregory said Wednesday the complaint centered on four employees and appears to refer to incidents that allegedly occurred more than a year ago. Two of the employees are on administrative leave pending the outcome of ongoing investigations by the plant and the NRC. One of the four resigned in November, and another was terminated in January.

A series of photos connected to the complaint that were obtained by The Courier purport to depict ANO guards asleep at their posts. In the images, three security guards dressed in what look to be uniforms sit reclining, eyes shut. One has a cap pulled over his eyes.

Gregory said it was impossible to tell where in the plant - if the photos were taken there - the images might have been recorded.

Lara Uselding, public affairs officer for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission based in Arlington, Texas, confirmed the presence this week of resident inspectors at the plant, but said she could not disclose specifics of another team on site.

Uselding said security is one element considered during regulatory activities, which are constantly conducted.

"The agency takes inattentiveness seriously," Uselding said. "The commission has done a lot to make sure we have certain fatigue laws in place to manage that issue."

Gregory emphasized that ANO is conducting its own investigation of the allegations concurrently with the NRC.

"One part of the investigation is to make sure we don't have a current issue," Gregory said. "That would be a big part of the investigation. They would also investigate incidents in the past. Obviously, inattentiveness while on duty here is totally unacceptable. It doesn't meet the expectations we have for our employees. It won't be tolerated. Having said that, it's still being investigated. It's still an allegation. There's a lot at stake here for a lot of people. So we want to make sure we get it right. ... We are closely looking at our policy, procedures and training program to see if there's areas where we need to improve as a result of the investigation. I'm quite certain that improvement will happen."

Gregory said guards are "expected to be fit for duty and attentive for their entire shift. There's policies in place to make sure that happens.

"Obviously, those policies are being looked at as the investigation continues," Gregory said, adding guards are not allowed to sleep even while on break or lunch.

Gregory further stated the allegations are receiving full attention of the plant.

"This is a serious allegation," she said. "We're not taking it lightly. If you work at a nuclear power plant like we do, you understand our business is unique and special. We understand the responsibility we have to operate this plant safely. We all have a vested interest in doing that. Most people out here have families living in this area, so we all have a vested interest in making sure this plant is safe and secure. It's our primary responsibility. We're aware of it and we do not take it lightly."

Security-related inspection reports for ANO posted at the NRC's website indicate that during inspections in 2010 and earlier this year, regulators, amid their review of plant procedures, records and activities and their interviews of personnel, noted "no findings" during inspections conducted Sept. 1, 2010; Sept. 10, 2010; and March 11, 2011.

During an inspection July 12, 2010, no "findings of significance" were identified, while during an inspection Oct. 21, 2010, a finding of "very low" security significance was identified, although no information relating to the specifics of the finding is publicly available.

Mary Kincy contributed information to this report.

For the record

Security-related inspection reports for ANO posted at the NRC's website indicate that during inspections in 2010 and earlier this year, regulators, amid their review of plant procedures, records and activities and their interviews of personnel, noted "no findings" during inspections conducted Sept. 1, 2010; Sept. 10, 2010; and March 11, 2011.

During an inspection July 12, 2010, no "findings of significance" were identified, while during an inspection Oct. 21, 2010, a finding of "very low" security significance was identified, although no information relating to the specifics of the finding is publicly available.